have any ill will towards me. >> you can watch this and other programs online at booktv.org. >> up next, jim newton recounts the tenure of america's 34th president, dwight eisenhower. he refutes the commonly-held criticism that president eisenhower was complacent by citing his transformation of a government $8 billion deficit to a $500 million surplus, the creation of an interstate highway system, and the president's constant refusal to utilize the atomic bomb when pressured by his generals. this is about 40 minutes. ..

>> jim has worked as a reporter, editor, and bureau chief for the "l.a. times" for more than 20 years, and he is currently editor at large. jim now serves as a member on the times editorial board, advises on matters, and writes a coal qum examining the policy and politics of southern california. he was a reporter for the atlantic journal constitution and was an assistant. jim is a graduate of dartmouth college and recipient of many local and national awards in journalism. he was part of the l.a. times coverage of the l.a. riots of 1992 and the earthquake in 1994,

both of which won pulitzer prizes for the staff. he's a senior fellow with ucla's school of public affairs and author of "justice for all: earl warren and the nation he made." please welcome a good friend of this institution and back to kansas, jim newton. [applause] >> good evening, everyone. i just, before i start, i just want to say how pleased i am to be back here. as tim mentioned, i've spent much of the past five years here and ate about every restaurant in your town. people here have been gracious and warm to me on my many visits, and i'm most grateful. thank you very much. i want to thank the staff of this great library and museum, a number of whom are acknowledged in the book, but deserve special

mention tonight. first is tim, deputy director here and a good friend, and armstrong, the ark vies of whom i was lucky to be assigned, and samantha kenner, responsible for the agrangements, and carl whob gracious to me in the long research. it is a special chooj as i learned to -- challenge as i terned to speak to people here about eisenhower. didn't he just play golf? so rather than review his presidency, i thought i'd focus in on a particular episode and relationship that stands at the interaction of my two books, his presidency, the white house years, and the biography of earl warren. they had a rocky relationship, but it climaxed in a powerful and much misunderstood moment in

american history, onefuls profund ram faye tigses and for the relationships between the branches of government as well as between the federal and state governments. those are rips that rely on the federal blend of power and mew cheel respect, and this particular episode provides vivid example of what occurs when the understoodmental deference to reason and authority, and in this case, between the states and federal government, falters and gives way. it is, i hope, a reminder that our government and society itself depends upon mutual respect. it's the habit of obedience. no order of any court, no mandate no matter how worthy exists without any other way to make it so. reason is the bipedding agent of social justice, and without it,

we're imperils because when reason fails, all that's left is force. divide eisenhower and earl warren were men of modest beginnings building wealth careers. ice was born in texas, and smaller than an office, and as you know, his parents were members of the river brethren, and when he left for west., it was the only time his brother heard their mother cry. he was responsible for the destruction of hitler's war machine first in north africa and then italy and the push across the northern european plain beginning with the d-day landings in normandy. he was urged to run for president in 1968, declined, and then -- 1948, declined, and agreed in

1952. he opened up the center of the country to commerce and trade, and later, of course, sponsored the federal highway system, at that time, the largest public works bromght in american history. his life was different, but with some parallels. he was born in los angeles where i live today, born in baker's field, and his dad worked for the railroad. warren and his sister grew up without much and grew up in public schools. he was a law school student at berkeley, not much of a student, by the way, another story. he was a veteran of world war i and went on to be a prosecutor. went on to be attorney general of california, and then finally governor. he was an extraordinarily gifted politician. he ran seven times for public office in california and won every race, elected three times as governor until the return of

jerry brown in my home state of late, the only three-term governor of california. he was elected in 1942, 1946, and 1950, and each of those was a quite exceptional race. in 1942, in the middle of the war, he ran against culbert olson, and in 1950, the third of the election, he beat an ally of fdr, beat fdr's son. in the 1946 election, warren was a republican and easily won the republican nomination for governor that year in the era of cross filing in california, and in 1946, he secured the nomination of the democratic party as well. that is a feat we don't expect to see repeated any time soon. warren's root to national prominence meant he was focused

largely on domestic affairs demonstrating public works on a grand scale using gas tax to build the highway system, eisenhower's plan drew some from warren's, and he launched an expansion of the state's much celebrated university system including the crix of the santa barbara campus. for their efforts, warren and eisenhower each, was on occasion, tarred with a great bug-a-boo of politicians. they were mostly out of the long and unsuccessful campaign to win universal health insurance in california, if that sounds familiar, and in the case of eisenhower, they imagined him a dupe of international communism, and one of his brothers would occasionally tease him about leading the country towards socialism. ike took it in stride. warren and eisenhower's lives

came in earnest in 1952 and they competed for the republican nomination for president. they both entered the convention in chicago that summer with hopes of winning. ike crafted a strategy to cease delegates of taft, while warren hoped the taft and eisenhower campaigns would deadlock and he would be acceptable. ike, of course, won, but the two of them got to know each other in the aftermath of the race, and having knowing and appreciate warren, it was natural that eisenhower would look for a place for him in the government. eisenhower considered appointing warren as secretary of the interior, but rounded out the cabinet without wrairn. in late 1952 as eisenhower prepared to leave if the korean front, he placed a call to warren, partly to apologize, but also to explain he would offer him the first vacancy on the united states supreme court. then, after further discussions

with his attorney general, eisenhower -- ed to offer warren the solicitor generalship. reasoning that warren could use that experience to freshen up his courtroom skills while awaiting a vacancy on the court. warren accepted that summer, but before the administration anowdgessed the move, then chief justice fred benson died. it was unexpected although he was overweight and a smoker, he was only 63 years old. ice and he were good friends, and eisenhower, when he got the news, was deer reeved. the reaction on the supreme court was measured. the court was badly divided over brown versus board of education, and the justices were stuck. so divided and unsure of what to do next, that felix frankfurtherer deviced a stall

by putting the case to the next term by asking the lawyers to respond to a series of questions from the court. when benson died in 1953, it was remarked it's the first solid evidence they received of the existence of god. he was an observant guy. eisenhower had not contemplated making him chief justice, but getting him the first justice. he did not tender the seat rightfully promised to him. dulles was just named secretary of state and aspired to be secretary of state and declined. after fencing, they persuaded ike they should deliver on the promised name nation and announced the appoint on september 30th of 1953.

congress was in recess at the time and warren resigned the governorship on a friday and was at the supreme court the following week. he took his seat as a justice designate, one other interesting thing to note, needless to say, almost inconceivable in today's judicial environment, and the other thing interesting about the nomination and confirmation because he was already seated on the court when the confirmation hearings started in the spring, warren declined to atent violating the separation of powers if he were required to testify, and he did not. again, hard to imagine today. what warren found when he came to the court was the badly divided court i just described to you on the issue of brown. there were at least three votes in the benson court to uphold school segregation in the united states. benson, tom clark, and stanley reid. reed was so committed to segregation, a few years

earlier, he refused to attend the christmas party if black pages were to be included. there was suggestion that there could have been two more votes, and therefore a majority of five. not so much on the principle of segregation or at all on the principle of segregation as indeference to what was an objection to what we now call judicial activism. jackson to douglas' ear were conflicted about ma majority to overrule the long standing precedent with the principle that separate, but equal fulfilled the 14th amendment command of equal protection. it's worth noting, however, that -- it's worth regarding douglas' perception where the votes were because douglas detested jackson, saw him in the worst light, and things were so

bad that in conference, douglas would leave the room until jackson was finished speaking. no matter where each of the justices lay precisely, warren knew as he settled too into the court, there were deep differences, and he was determined to bring them back together. that process began on december 5, 1953, the first conference of warn's tenure in which brown was discussed. warren, as was customary for the chief justice, spoke first that day beginning with a simple statement. the time had come to resolve the issue. there would be no many delays. having said that, he then made this bracing assertion. there was no way, he said, that he could imagine upholding segregation in the brown case other than by asserting the basic premise that the negro race is inferior. that was a fairly stunning claim. throughout all the vincent years, the court knocked down some segregated school

arrangements, and in his case for graduate school, saying the separate facilities for blackings were equal only in fiction. there were no adequate facilities, but even came close to saying mere separation constituted inequality, and always stopped short of that. never willing to argue that separation itself was predicated on racial inferiority. in fact, the whole notion of separate but equal assume the opposite. now, the court's newest and chief justice made clear he was unwilling to continue the fiction. that put jackson in particular in an excruciating position. it was one thing for frank to argue that judicial restraint bound him in the matter. it was another for him to be asked to defend racial superiority. they were both, remember, were new deal liberals ideologically, sp e-both supported and appointed by fdr, and frank

represented the ncaap and the appeals, first supreme court justice to hire a black clerk. it would have been, as i said, excruciating for him to be accused of defending white supremacy, even if the service of judicial restraint. having staked out his position boldly, warren then went easy on what to do. he tried to blame the south for jim jim crow and open to e remedies for addressing the problem. perhaps most importantly was a tactical decision he made asking the judges not to record their vote that day. they speak, and then they record their votes for the record, but he didn't want them locking into position on the issue. he proposed they talk it over informally over the weeks. with that, politicians went to work. among those who nervously awaited the work was the

president who appointed him. in the course of researching my eisenhower book, they described the mandate that describes it important about the issue. my dad, he said, was a commander in chief, not a social reformer. that's correct. eisenhower did not run for president or win the presidency because he had great plans to eliminate discrimination, address poverty, or even to build highways. he was elected in the middle of korean war. he was an astonishingly capable commander. as president, eisenhower would end the war and govern for another seven and a half years during which his closest advisers urged him to use the military and nuclear weapons to resolve conflicts in korea, china, berlin, and elsewhere.

he held those advisers off and despite a running set of armed conflicts with the forces of international communism from southeast asia to suez canal and central europe. ike left office losing one american life in combat, 5 young man killed by a sniper in lebanon. these two terms represent the most sustained period of peace and prosperity in the american 20th century. if ice was gifted in matters of diplomatic strategy, and he was, he was less sure of himself in dplessic affairs. he had been raised in a segregated military. you never reported to or worked as an equal with a black man, much less a black woman. some of his closest friends were southerners, vacationed in georgia at his favorite gulf coast. he was not racist, but nothing in his background gave him

connection to the struggles of african-americans. he was a gradualist believing americans were great people sacrificing in numbers to defeat naziism, and believed they were better when allowed to be, not forcedded to by the government. as he built the court in brown, ike worrieded what the court might do. his great fear as he expressed privately was the court might issue an order that others would simply refuse to obey, that it would mandate school integration and others would close schools rather than open them to blacks. in that, turned out he was right. soon after being president, ike hosted dinners, dress were black ties, and to be indicted wassen an extraordinary honor and few men declined.

on february 8, 1954, the list was womenless. the professor of kansas and ire win griswaled was there and smith, the former head of central intelligence, now undersecretary of state for eisenhower, and among the guests was earl warren and he stewed san antonio after he took his place at the table. he was seated within an earshot of the party, a favored lawyer who was once a democratic candidate for president. in 1954, though, davis was known as the lawyer for the state of the south carolina. in its defense against the consolidated lawsuits collectively known as brown versus board of education. warren, who was a stickler for

propriety and a somewhat prickly character took offense of being seated so close next to a lawyer. as the dinner broke up and the gentlemen retired to the study, eisenhower took warren and whispered in his ear. these are not bad people, eisenhower said. all they are concerned about is to see their sweet little girls are # not required to sit in school alongside some big overgrown negroes. there is no excusing that crude and appalling remark, and warren made eisenhower pay for it by including it in the meme morse which is why we have a record for it. it marked the end of relations between the president and chief justice and foreshadowed the relationship between them in the next few years. it was publicly apparent a few months later. in may, warren announced from the bench the decision as olely

oliver brown versus the board of education in kansas. the decision on paper read, we conclude in the field of public education, the doctrine of separate but equal has no place. as he read it, however, warren interposed a word, we unanimously include. justice reid, the last hold out in brown wiped away a tear. marshall, a lawyer for the plaintiffs stood in amazement. warren sensed the power of the moment writing when the word "unanimously" was spoken, a wave of emotion swept the room. no movement, yet a manifestation that defies description. eisenhower was not among those moved. he elected to receive brown not as a triumph or or as a fulfillment of a constitutional right. he regarded it as an order. the supreme court has spoken, he said at a press conference two

days after the ruling was handed down, and i'm sworn to uphold the processes in the country, and i'm trying. i will obey. so began the struggle for the meaning and effectiveness of brown. brown was solid in 1955 known as brown 2 allowing brown 1 to be implemented with all deliberate speed, a recipe providing for much deliberation and press little feed, and given that room, many of the south concocted ways to delay and defie. the south was encouraged by the impression that eisenhower himself had reservations about brown. as they experimented with the resistance, the court demanded its own insistence as the court changed and ranks were filled with appointees. john on the bench in 1955, william brennan in 1956.

eventually potter stewart as well making for five justices that ike put on the court. despite those new members, the changes in membership, the court was steadfast in insistence that in demanding the end of the jim you. despite the comfort of what the speed was moving, they reenforced the work, and the appointments to district courts provided the bull work of the jew dish ri's brave attempt to fashion brown into a working doctrine at the school distribute level. ike was capable of a crude remark and also noble work. by 1957, though, ike had another reason to be unhappy with his appointees on the court. it was that summer a host of cases involving the rights of legislators and law enforcement officials to investigate communism were handed down by the warren court, first coming on june 3, 1957. it involved a union president claimed clinton janx, found good

many of lying to investigators filing paperwork indicating he had never been 5 communist. the lawyer asked to see the statements by the witness who testified against him to conduct the cross-examination. the judge denied the opportunity, and the lawyer appealed the conviction object basis being denied the opportunity to adequately prepare defense. he wrote for the majority that overturned the conviction, and only clark defended, complaining vigorously that the court's ruling would provide a roman holiday for defendants eager to rummage the government's secrets. two weeks later, there were four decisions remittings to domestic security known as the red monday cases. the court defended the free association rights of a new hampshire economics professor by the name of -- what was his name? sweeney i guess, and watt dins versus the united states, john watkins refused to answer to the

house. both decisions written by warren including the famous sentence, "there is no congressional power to expose for the sake of exposure." the court that day reinstated a lee leaguered state department employee by the name of john service. it reversed convictions of a group of california communists under the smith act in yates versus the united states. they were the most conservative of ike's appointees to the court. eisenhower was sensed, and his temper blew. he was hosting another stag dinner at the night after red monday, and the guests were assembled, and he let it rip. never so mad in his life to see communism coddled by the court. he was fed up with warren. although the dinners were off the record, his remarks were in the press, embarrassing him and forcing him to apologize to the

chief justice. warren slugged it off, but years later directing ike directly. i would kill the sob's eisenhower responded and warren regarded the reply. congress should be noted was not quite ease sent over the issues in this period. indeed, once congressional segregationists found commonground with congressional domestic security hawks, the implications for the court were grave. 2341959, the congress came within one vote of stripping the court of its authority to hear cases all together, and outcome that would have radically altered. and the court avoid the the calamity because they persuaded a senator from utah unless he refused to send the matter back to committee, the president might have to break the tie and damage the chances for president. it was a dangerously close call

as reported later. a period at a -- appearing at a press conference in 1957, eisenhower equivocated as he had so often about civil right, but straight straightforward about what lay ahead for him saying, i can't imagine any other circumstance forcing me to send troops into the area on federal court because the common sense of america will never require it. he may not have overestimate the common sense of america, but that of orville. he was born in greecey creek, arkansas, and he was raced a socialist. his middle initial, e., stood for jew -- eugene. in 1957, he needed to prove he was tough on the issue of

integration. by the standards of the 1950s south, little rock had done a commendable job in trying to adhere to brown i and brown ii. after the court's decision, the little rock school board shuted a plan -- submitted a plan to the congressional judge, and it was approved, a gradual plan integrating the school slowly over a decade, but it satisfied the vague requirement with all deliberate speed. it was moving forward until the arkansas legislature and others declared opposition. facing a tough reelection came pain, took a stand to protect the right flank politically calling out the arkansas national guard on orders to prevent nine black students from entering the local high school, and the result is on september 3, the little rock nine showed up to school and were turned away by federal troops to thwart the orders of a federal court. two months earlier, eisenhower was unable to imagine any set 6

circumstances requires him to use troops to enforce such an order, and now they forced the issue. even then, though, ike did not rush into action. against the add violation and working but therein intermediary, he was summoned to the naval base where they were vacationing. he arrived on september 14th, and the conversation was mild talking about serving under general paton in world war ii, and eisenhower talked about serving over patton in world war ii, and than think settled to business. they had proposes. one suggested a ten day cooling off period asking eisenhower for the use of federal marshalls to maintain the order. that must have struck ike. a governor who had unlawfully taken command of the guard was now asking for marshalls too. ike countered with his proposal.

he could leave the guard in place, but change orders from blocking entrance into the school, to providing safe passage. if agreed, eisenhower pledges the justice department urged the judge to drop the contempt citation against the governor, if not, he could expect just one outcome. as he put it, the state would lose. he gambled at eisenhower's ambivalence of civil rights, not to he thinks his reluctance to be the first american president since grant to dispatch federal troops into a southern city, causing him to compromise. he this h that wrong. -- he had that prong. he played for time, he skipped a hearing, and his lawyers at the hearing moved for judge davis to rescue himself, was not granted, and they stormed out on behalf

of the plaintiffs. in their absence, davis ordered the desegregation plan to resume and ordered him not to be ob instruct the. that was fried afternoon, and -- friday afternoon, and being in a frenzy, abruptly withdrew the guard at 6:25 that evening. the citizens counsels and clansmen and thugs drawn to little rock had the run of the town spending the weekend agitating and they were ready when monday morning came. that theme is the most destructing one in the country. four black reporters were beaten and protesters were wheeling on a knot of dignified black students have images of the dignity of the black pioneers and debasement of the white antagonists. the students made it inside the

high school that morning, but by 11:30, the mob outside was such a frenzy, that the major had police escort the students home. the major was on a desperate situation losing control of the city, could not turn to the state for help, so mayor asked eisenhower for help begging in humanity and law and order to send troops. at 12:15 a.m., they had the deployment of the 101st airborne division signing the formal order. the arrival of the 101st airborne had the intended effect . those who showed such venn no , ma'am to the boys and girls were weakened. neither reason nor deference, the imaginety of the united

states of supreme court made an impression. the presence of the american army did. the soldiers remained in place long enough to establish, hold order, and then were withdrawn. that spring, earnest was the first black student to receive a diploma from little rock high. next to his mother that day was a young minister, martin luther king. the crisis built as the nation's legislative and judicial branches feuded over domestic security. it erupted when a governor thought he could veto federal authority and ended with a reminder of who was in charge. eisenhower did not summon the 101st airborne because he applauded earl warren and the colleagues, did not invoke federal authority because he believed passionately in the cause of civil rights or believed prompt school integration was a national

necessity. he called on the army, his army, because our society depends on record for order and authority, even when the authority is directed towards ghouls that not all in our society accept. as it was put from the oval office, proper and sensible observance of the law demanded obedience which the country has the right to respect from all people. this, unfortunately, has not been the case at little rock. at little rock, the supreme court demanded change and the governor cynically obstructed it. they were fighting over civil rights, and that battled continued through the 1950s and 1960s as resistance tested the court again and again. eisenhower was fiting for democracy, forcing those who flaunted the institutions to accept civilization's basic requirements, obedience to law and respect for order. at little rock, the court

discovered its limits of power and it was eisenhower who previlled, and with him, the nation. i thank you, all, for listening. it's my honor, as i said, to spend many months in your time and be immersed in the life of this great man. it's been a pleasure to speak with you this evening, and i'd be delighted to take your questions. thank you. [applause] >> if you ask a question, come to the microphone so we can capture that on the audio and video. >> can you hear me? i want to pick up where we left off talking about up there that you're someone born after eisenhower left office and how has that -- someone that reads

your book, get a different perspective than other authors that lived through the eisenhower era and lived through the 50s? >> it's tough to know how the book would be different if i lived through it obviously, but i think this -- the strength of historical writing 1 not the personal experience of the author, but rather the extent of the record and the ability to make sense of the record. these two books, neither of which are people i've met or had any personal feeling about one way or another, as a result of my own life experience, so i think at a minimum, it's not a weakness. >> there's more papers available now than with the previous books? >> yes, there is as the people here at the library can explain better than i. there's a process of declassification going on, and new records go on all the time. in some ways, the most exciting bit of historical research here

at the library was working in the reading room, and tim came in saying there's something that gist arrived that you might be interested in, a batch of material related to the farewell address missing for over 50 years turned up. there's the story bind that that the principle author of the address had turned over most of the paper to the library here, but for reasons that are a little inexplicable, held on to six boxes of material stored in a barn for year, and then his son moved them to a boat house in minnesota, and summer or two ago when they were cleaning out the boat house, kathy said to grant, we have to do something with these box, and they opened them up and looked at them seeing they contained more than 20 long missing drafts of the farewell address and memos and material relating to it. it was a 24reu8 for me to be -- thrill for me to be among the first people to look at them and

reminder that new material emerges all the time in the most unexpected ways. i did a piece about this for the new yorker, and someone pointed out in connection with that, had he vea cationed in florida or in the south, undoubtedly, those papers would not have survived, but the fact they were frozen every winter surely contributed to the survival and therefore to our much improved understanding of the speech. thank you. >> wondering if you could talk about the process of picking supreme court justices? i think he said earl warren was the biggest mistake made as president and william brennan was the second biggest. a question of him not doing the homework necessarily in picking the justices, and where on the

spectrum do you think ike would have liked his supreme court justices to have been? it seems his reputation is not necessarily being all that conservative, maybe he wouldn't have picked five scalias, where what would he preferred from the justices? >> on your first piece of the point about the remark he is said to have made about brennan and warren, it's hard to find the source of the actual remark. what's clear is he was disappointed in the two. he said that in different ways throughout the years. this -- his process for picking justices was surprisingly casual by today's standards. he delegated the responsibility to brownell as long as he was there, and we're lucky he did. he was an exceptionally good choice of justices and judges, and i do think some of that is part of ike's military tradition to deference of so boar adapts -- so board nants whom he trusted.

he was casual about the process. in 1956 when he went to choose william brennan, he was in the middle of his reelection campaign, had not faired well -- faired well with almost every demographic in 1952, but asked brownell in the political terms to find him a moderate democrat who was a cat lick sitting on a north eastern bench somewhere in hopes that would sure up a weakness in 1956, and he got most of what he wanted there. he got a democratic from the northeast who was a catholic, but not a moderate. you know, three out of four. you know, i think the best example of the justice he would have liked more is hair lain, an extraordinary gifted, very principled conservative justice of the court, and on the issue of warren, and i'll conclude with this, i get why he has some reason to be disappointed with warren. he was no right to be

disappointed with brennan. the notion that brennan let him down is silly. in the case of warren, i think they miss understood a -- misunderstood a certain aspect of warren's political growing up. he saw warren as believed he saw something of himself, a republican moderate who saw his opposition as to coming from taft, who also rejected much of the new deal, saw him as that central republican, internationalist, not an isolationist and imagined they were more alike than they were. warren grew up in the period of californian progressivism, an entity unto itself, and i think warren was a more predictable justice than ike thought he was if ike understood that aspect of his penalty. his personalty. i think that's responsible for the diversement and disappointment. anyone else?

with that, i'll call it an evening, and i know tim wants to come back that, and with that, i appreciate you being here. [applause] >> for more information, visit latimes.com and search his name. >> on your screen a eli, a staff writer with the "washington post" who wrote "ten letters". what are they? >> ten of the letters that come into president obama every day, and really a reflection of the mail that comes from across the country. you know, republicans and democrats, fourth graders, grandmothers, it's just really democratic collection that comes into him and usual whether i writes back one or two letters a day. >> how are the letters delivered to him, carefully edited, or are they frank as well?

>> they can be frank, but getting the letters to the desk really requires an army. mail used to be handled inside the white house before the anthrax scare and moved off site to a secret office building where 1500 volunteers and 100 full time staffers work every day to take the 20,000 letters and categorize them by topic, positive, negative, and then they make sure the ten that the president gets reflect that, those numbers, so he sees usually about five positive, five negative letters, plenty starting out dear mori on and then other positive ones. >> how did you get access to the mail? he receives 20,000 letters a day? >> he does, 20,000 letters a day. i wrote a longer newspaper piece about the letters, and, you know, the letters are -- the white house can be tough on access. the letters are one of the very few things they like talking about because they believe it shows he's connected to the country and listening, and in truth, what the letts